Tuesday, 29 January 2013

MPs have voted to delay the redrawing of constituency
boundaries until at least 2018. This is great news for Cornwall,
as the “Devonwall” will not be created in advance of the next General Election.

The outcome was 334 votes to 292 to delay any changes.

I understand that Cornwall’s
three Liberal Democrat MPs supported the delay, along with the whole of their
parliamentary party. However it is a terrible shame that the Lib Dems only took
this stance to spite their Coalition partners – after the vast majority has
backed the process to create a Devonwall seat.

But unbelievably, Cornwall’s
three Conservative MPs voted to push ahead with the boundary changes – which
would have led to the inevitable creation of a cross-Tamar seat, which they pretended
to campaign against.

I thought you might appreciate the above photograph from the
Keep Cornwall Whole rally at Saltash, which featured Sheryll Murray (in the blue) campaigning
against Devonwall. Today, she voted for Devonwall - shameful!

It has been a hectic day, but I can report that following
todays’s Full Council meeting (more on that later), I was re-elected Chairman
of the Clay Country Local Action Group. The LAG has been instrumental bringing
forward projects in the China Clay Area with grants totalling over £1.5
million, and I am very pleased to be in a position to take the LAG
through to the end of its programme period.

Thursday, 24 January 2013

In tomorrow’s Cornish Guardian, my latest column will focus
on global inequality. It is as follows:

I am presently reading a book entitled “The Spirit Level.”
Written by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett, this well-researched publication
seeks to demonstrate how many of society’s ills are significantly worse in
countries which suffer from great inequality.

It is a throught-provoking read and makes startling claims about
how the vast majority would benefit – including society as whole – if there was
less disparity between the rich and the less-well-off.

And in a similar vein, Oxfam has challenged the World’s political
leaders to do more to tackle inequality at this week’s World Economic Forum in Switzerland,
demanding a “global new deal to reverse decades of increasing inequality.”

In a new report, the charity states that efforts to tackle
poverty are being hindered by an “explosion in extreme wealth,” which it describes
as “economically inefficient, politically corrosive, socially divisive and
environmentally destructive.”

Oxfam also claims that “the 100 richest people in the World
earned enough last year to end extreme poverty suffered by the poorest on the
planet four times over.” It notes how the World’s 100 most wealthy individuals
enjoyed a net income of $240 billion (£150 billion) last year, while those in
“extreme poverty” in developing countries struggle through on less than $1.25
(78p) a day.

It is also clear that, over the last twenty years, the
incomes of the richest one per cent have increased by 60% while the financial
crisis has “accelerated rather than slowed” their wealth generation.

The chief executive of Oxfam, Barbara Stocking, has stated
that “we can no longer pretend that the creation of wealth for a few will
inevitably benefit the many – too often the reverse is true …”

The charity rightly argues that the “accumulation of wealth
and income on an unprecedented scale, is at the expense of secure jobs and
decent wages for the poorest” which undermines the “ability of people who
survive on … low wages to improve their situation and escape poverty.”

And tellingly, Oxfam even suggests that “UK
inequality is rapidly returning to levels not seen since the time of Charles
Dickens.”

It is my belief that everyone – in Cornwall,
in the UK and
throughout the wider World – should prioritise ways to make society fairer,
more equal, and to better spread the benefits of wealth creation. This is an
issue of such significance that it cannot be ignored by politicians of any
party.

Sunday, 20 January 2013

My latest
article for the Cornish Guardian was published on Friday. It addresses
government cuts to local government and was as follows:

On 19th
December 2012, the
Communities Minister Eric Pickles announced the latest financial
settlement for local government.

He told the House of Commons that the average cut to funding for local
councils was 1.7%. Putting spin into over-drive, he claimed that it represented
a “bargain to local authorities."

Cornwall Council was told it would face a cut of 1.8% to what the
government has defined as “spending power” – a spurious concept which aggregates
monies spent in particular areas (including some funds not even under the
control of the local authority).

However,
according to staff at the unitary council, the “Government’s calculation is
incorrect and double counts figures” and “in terms of actual comparable direct
government funding, this is down by 6% compared with last year (£18m).”

Calculations by
the Rural Services Partnership of Local Authorities has meanwhile found that “predominately
rural councils have fared much worse than urban areas.”

In fact, the announcement about the settlement has been mired in total confusion,
caused by governmental incompetence. After its official publication, numerous
Councils had to contact the Department of Communities and Local Government
(DCLG) to seek clarity and point out fundamental errors.

DCLG even sent out
a revised settlement on 4th January, but information on a range of funding
sources, such as the Education Support Grant, were still not included within
the figures. Councils are being forced to make assumptions about what funding
they might receive, causing further uncertainty.

There are also double-standards
at the centre of the debate around this settlement.

It does, for
example, include £36 million to cover the cost of Council Tax Benefit to the
Council – but this is estimated to be £6 million less than what it cost in
2012/13. And yet, when Councils seek to find ways to bridge this extra funding
gap and manage benefit payments, it is Eric Pickles who condemns the approach
of certain local councils as “obscene.”

The reality is
that cuts to local government have been greater than to almost all other parts
of the public sector. And for Cornwall Council the cuts will, over a four-year
period, equate to a reduction in spend of £500 million.

This is undermining
the ability of local government to provide those vital public services that
residents should be able to expect, but the Coalition has stated that future
years could see even more cuts to local council budgets.

I am concerned that if the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition
does not reverse its cuts, it will simply destroy local government.

Tuesday, 15 January 2013

Mebyon Kernow has welcomed the news that the House of Lords
has voted to delay the boundary review into parliamentary seats.

Following a debate on Monday, an amendment to the Electoral
Registration and Administration Bill to delay the boundary review until 2018, was
passed by 300 votes to 231.

This means that a Devonwall constituency will almost
certainly not be created in advance of the 2015 General Election.

MK Deputy Leader and Cornwall Councillor Andrew Long has
released the following statement on behalf of the Party.

“It is fantastic news that Coalition plans for a Devonwall
seat have been sidelined and that the territorial integrity of Cornwall
has been protected for the next few years.

“I remain angry at how the Coalition attempted to force a
cross-Tamar parliamentary seat on Cornwall
– with 95% of their MPs voting in favour of Devonwall.

“And I find it amazing that the collapse of the Boundary
Review has happened because of Coalition infighting – not because of the best
interests of Cornwall – though this
is not how certain local representatives of the Coalition are publicising what happened.

“If the vote in the House of Lords is to mean anything, both
the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats need to pledge that they will
‘forever’ rule out the possibility of a Devonwall seat.”

Cllr Long has written also written to David Cameron and Nick
Clegg to seek assurances that both Coalition partners will commit themselves to
respecting the historic border of Cornwall
in the future.

At today’s Full Council meeting, I challenged Conservative
and Liberal Democrat councillors to resign from their respective parties in
protest at the damaging cuts being imposed on local government.

This was within the debate which followed the decision of the
Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition to pass responsibility for council
tax benefits onto Cornwall Council, albeit with an allocation of £36 million to
cover the costs – leaving a massive financial black-hole of over £5 million.

After the meeting, I made the following comment:

“Coalition cuts to local government are disproportionate and
are undermining the ability of councils to provide public services. It is also
shameful that the cuts, such as the localisation of council tax benefit, are
increasingly likely to fall on the less-well-off.

“At today’s meeting, there were plenty of ‘crocodile tears’
from Conservative and Liberal Democrat councillors about the unpalatable
position in which elected members found themselves, trying to bridge yet
another black-hole in their budget.

“But if they are serious stopping these truly damaging cuts,
Conservative and Liberal Democrat councillors should send a strong message to
the Coalition by resigning from their respective parties.

“That is the sort of decisive political action that the
likes of David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Eric Pickles will understand.”

Further information

Local Government First magazine has stated that the
reduction in funding to local councils “will now exceed 33 per cent … and for
some councils, it may go much higher.” The publication also notes that Whitehall
budgets are “being cut by on average 8 per cent.”

At the Full Council meeting on 15th January, members failed
to agree a way forward dealing with the localisation of council tax benefit.
There was a proposal that council tax benefit payments for people of working
age not be reduced, which MK members supported, but this was lost by 44 votes
to 41. After about two hours of debate, the issue was deferred and there will
now be an extra Full Council meeting to reconsider the issue.